Employment Bill [HL]

We have a tremendous opportunity to influence the content of the code if we are now being presented with it in its draft form. I reiterate my personal thanks to the Minister and the noble Lord, Lord Bach, for fulfilling the promise they made to me at Second Reading. However, if we are now debating what is in essence a draft, it might be helpful if we could have a wider explanation of why it has been produced in this form. I am not as well versed as the Minister in employment law, although I declare an interest as a partner in the law firm, Beachcroft, where many of my colleagues are. As I understand it, this is not a replacement code, but a new one that echoes the content of previous codes. It would be helpful for us to get an analysis of what this has been produced from, the extent to which it is still in draft form, and which parts may well still be amended even before consultation. I am not necessarily saying that it would be helpful to have all that today, but it would be helpful if we could have an analysis of the arguments for and against before Report. Tomorrow morning, I am giving evidence to a committee looking at the 30-year rule. The committee was established by the Prime Minister to work out when guidance should be published. I wonder whether the Minister, as he blows the trumpet for Britain across the world, might establish a first and publish the guidance on the draft code he received from his officials. If he wanted to put that on the record, I would be interested to see it.